Buckeye approves Ventana Ranch 2 mixed-use project in contentious 5-2 vote despite opposition

e e e all this meeting to order this is the city of Bucky regular council meeting for February 4th 20125 we are going to begin with the invocation led by Mrs Don cheat him forever in a service Ministry followed by The Pledge led by council member hagestad honor to join you and PR overs just release our voices up to the Lord so would you join me in prayer thank you Heavenly Father for your grace and your mercy that you pour out upon us thank you especially for the freedom that we have to worship honor and embrace you Jesus I thank you for the city leaders that you've placed in their positions to fulfill their role and to make decisions according to your plan and your purposes for not just the city but most importantly for the people that live here father your word tells us that a Citizens we should pray for the governmental authorities that are placed over us and so father as I usually do I ask holy spirit that you inhabit the mayor and this elected Council and bless each of them as they willingly serve this community I believe that this Council will make decisions that will positively influence the future of Buckeye for many years to come I ask great blessing blings to be poured out upon them their businesses and families for their faithfulness to serve you I ask God that you bless each level of City officials represented here tonight as they also serve in their respective positions Lord Jesus I ask that you give this Council and the city leaders the wisdom of Solomon to govern am in the conflicting interests and growing concerns not just tonight but in every decision that they make father give them a sense of the welfare and true needs of the people of Buckey and surrounding communities place within each of them discernment and a keen thirst for justice and rightness as they serve you in their positions give them confidence in making decisions that are good and fitting for this community and its future Lord I ask that you grant them the ability to work together in harmony with the focus on what's what's best for the future of this great City I pray that you give each of them Assurance of what you would what would please you and what would benefit those who live and work in and around our beloved city of Buckey I ask that you bless each person with a personal peace in their lives and in the lives of their families so that they will find joy in the tasks you've called them to do in Jesus name I pray amen amen please join me in the pledge I pledge aliance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice a lot of pressure is a lot of pressure all right thank you both very much T it's good seeing you um we will now uh have the roll call please council member Yonker here council member Barry here counc Goodman president council member heggestad here council member beard here hustus here may orsborne present thank you very much item number two is comments from the public members of the the audience May comment on any non-agenda item of interest do we have any speaker request cards there are no speaker requests okay we'll move on to three WS presentations and proclamations we have none for tonight item number four is consent agenda new business approval of items on the consent agenda all items with an asct are considered to be routine matters will be enacted by one motion and vote of the city council there will be no separate discussion of these items unless a council member request the section may include the approval of minutes from previous meetings Council for the consent agenda what is your pledge Mr Mayor I'd like to make a motion to approve consent agenda items 4 a as an adom through four I as an Ida second I have a motion uh for approval of the consent agenda and a second all in favor say I I I I opposed and consent agenda passes unanimous get on to item number five public hearings and non-consent new business business 5A Council will hold a public hearing only regarding a blank annexation petition request to Annex one parcel of land totaling approximately 3.7 Acres from Maricopa County to the city of Buckeye located at 600 North Jack Rabbit Trail approximately 1,17 ft from the southwest corner of Roosevelt and Jack Rabbit Trail and Andrea Marquez will be presenting yes uh good evening mayor and Council Andrea Marquez senior planner with uh development services and as you mentioned tonight we are here for the first public hearing for 195th Avenue property annexation so before you is a vicinity map um as you can see it's it's approximately um 1,000 ft south of the I 10 it's just on the west side of Jack Rabbit Trail it's uh 3.7 Acres as you can see it's surrounded by both mirac the county jurisdiction and also the city of Buckey um the proposal or the ask tonight for annexation is for approximately 3.7 acres under our general plan it's under business Commerce the current zoning under Maricopa County is industrial 2 which is light industrial the request is annexation in the zoning um which will be equivalent to the Maricopa County is our light Industrial District i1 so the intent is for any future improvements to be permitted through the city for storage expansion currently there is an existing building in business um this facility is used for the manufacturing of pre-fabricated wood building wall panels and everything is enclosed the subject site meets the size dimension um contiguity requirements established by State Statute the applicant in the city is are required to um record a blank petition which was recorded on January 6th all the required notices have been completed there were no public comment other than um the uh neighbor to the north just had uh questions for the applicant no public comment specific to the annexation I receiv to date and there are no outstanding issues from any of the reviewing departments as mentioned for tonight there is no action um conduct um it's only to conduct a public hearing um we will be considering an ordinance for approving the annexation and that is anticipated to be scheduled for March 4th on the next upcoming council meeting are there any questions okay thank you very much um first this is a public hearing only so we will open a public hearing uh I don't have any speaker request cards do we have any we have no speaker request cards for item 5A so we will close the public hearing and Council any questions on 5A all right I'm not seeing any questions um thank you very much we'll move on to item number five B Council to hold a public hearing only regarding a blank annexation petition requesting to Annex eight Parcels of land an adjacent rideway consisting of approximately 167.5 Acres from Maricopa County to the city of Buckey located at the southwest corner of radaway and Yuma Road and Mandy Woods will be presenting good evening mayor and members of the council um I'm Mandy Woods Senior planner with development services um and I'm presenting case plz M2 24-6 which is an annexation located at the southwest corner of verado way and Yuma Road this is the first of two required public hearings for this request um just to give um a little bit of context on the request tonight um it is it does comprise of approximately eight parcels and um right away and the size is um just under 16 68 Acres the exhibit on the following page will show on the actual boundary um but just for some history the right of way and there are some city-owned parcels um that were intended for right away as well some of you may remember this began an annexation process separately two years ago um and then City's request these were combined with this private request just for Simplicity of processing moving forward or site text as I mentioned this is the the boundary that's being considered um just under 168 Acres shown in red there um to the north we have um the vacant auxiliary field which is owned by the state land Department to the South is vacant or agricultural land East is um some educational um use as well as a future commercial corner with storage and Retail uses West is the existing single family residential community Dan the general plan land use for this is neighborhood for context only um the um there is a concurrent minor General plan amendment that will be considered at a future um meeting it will have to go through Planning and Zoning commission and then return to council for consideration it's just for for context but that's not part of the annexation request tonight that is um to amend approximately 45 Acres along verata way to to business Commerce existing zoning um is County Rural 43 so the initial zoning that would be assigned upon annexation would be city of Buckeye single family residential 43 which is the most similar District in the city however there is um a concurrent resoning to planned area development that like the GPA um it is intended to go through pnz and then we'll return to council at a future hearing as well so that's just for context the pad itself includes a mix of um residential uses commercial uses at the corner and then some business park uses as well request does meet all eligibility requirements that are established by State Statute the blank petition was recorded on January 7th of this year all notices were completed Public public comment has been received to date regarding this application all departments have reviewed and have no outstanding issues and just like the last case there's uh no action that's required tonight this is just strictly to um conduct a public hearing and then consideration of an ordinance that would uh approve the annexation will occur at a future city council meeting I am here to answer any questions um and I believe the applicant is here as well thank you okay thank you Mandy uh I have no speaker request cards are there any on this particular no speaker request and we Mr Mayor yes sir I do have let me let me first open uh the public hearing we have no speaker request cards correct all right and uh anybody from the public wishing to speak I'm seeing none so we will close the public hearing and vice mayor yes I just one question uh does this annexation include any part of rway or the bridge over the Roseville canal um it does include a portion of the RightWay along verado way that hasn't already been annexed it's it's bringing in here let me just go back to the image um it does include a little bit of right rway yes Does it include the bridge I believe so if that's not already in the city it would include basically everything adjacent to the property okay okay and any other questions from Council all right this is uh public hearing only uh there will be no action taken on this item thank you Miss Woods thank you all right item 5 C Council to hold a public heing take action on resolution number 0225 approving a minor General plan Amendment to the imagined Buckeye General plan 240 to change the land use designation of approximately good evening mayor uh council with your permission I would like to present items 5 C and 5D together uh this evening they are both related to the same property and then uh as most of you are accustomed at the end we'll ask for separate public hearings separate motion so uh both of the proposals tonight uh are related to a project called Ventana Ranch 2 uh the first request is for a minor General plan Amendment the second is for a rezoning of the property you can see the site um is located at the northeast corner of Watson Road and Southern Avenue uh it is currently vacant uh used for agricultural purposes U surrounding uses the aerial forgive me it's a little bit old but the Rost Stress For Less Distribution Center is located directly south of of this site in the uh area that's in this areal shown as agricultural um to the west of the property are two uh single family residential subdivision Sonoran Vista and Riata West um to the east is a county Island which is a mix of large lot uh rural residential type of uses as well as some kind of cottage industry light industrial types of uses occurring on those properties as well uh and then to the north is a uh platted uh subdivision called Ventana Ranch Phase 2 and as I go through this presentation I'll kind of show you how this project works with the residential portion uh the zone in is currently all planned residential which is an obsolete Zone that that allows for basically single family residential uh types of development on the property um commercial and Industrial types of uses are not currently permitted and the general plan is neighborhood which is the designation that uh supports a variety of of residential multif family single family uh varying densities as well as supporting commercial uh types of uses that that support uh the adjacent neighborhoods so uh shopping center with a grocery store would be appropriate in the neighborhood uh an Ikea would not that would be something much more Regional in nature and that would be more appropriate in the red color which is the business Commerce uh so with that segue uh the initial request is uh for a minor General plan Amendment uh that would cover not the entirety of the property you can see just the uh the portion outlined in Black which is on this slide shown in red um it would change the designation of that [Music] serving just the small adjacent neighborhoods um more of a regional type of presence uh they do allow Business Park uh uses within that business Commerce land use designation um and those are light industrial uses that are occurring completely inside of enclosed buildings so not your heavier industrial uses not your outdoor storage types of uses uh and usually they're Limited in scale uh where they're not producing uh a uh a large amount of of truck traffic uh to area so it's it's it's the type of uh buildings that would be occupied by a pool contractor or a uh a flooring uh company or or something like that uh in most uh in most cases um how is business Commerce different from employment scale typically um we're talking about size of buildings uh the cross stck warehouses that you see um you know Five Below for instance uh that would be an employment style of of employ uh of Industrial Development um whereas business Commerce would be something more like you see along the freeway in um some of the neighboring jurisdictions to the east uh smaller buildings typically with uh storefront type of of facades uh with smaller businesses in them uh the second request is to take the full property so that that 43 or so Acres uh that I just talked about along with the portion just to the West that wraps the hard corner I do want to point out that the the hard Corner itself is you can see where my mouse is moving uh is owned separately uh by a different owner and is not included in this uh this application ideally in the future uh this owner would be able to acquire that property and include it in in a unified development so the uh rezoning request uh tonight would be to change the zoning from planned residential which I mentioned is for single family residential uh to a planned area development that would divide the site into two separate distinct sub areas uh pada area which is the corner kind of a a reverse r-shaped or a seven uh shaped property uh flanking that corner would allow for commercial uses that would be based on the C1 and C2 commercial zoning districts that the city has with uses more narrowly tailored for instance um mini storage and uh car washes and and some of the uses that we've seen a prolifer proliferation of in the city uh that we think you know maybe are are a little bit oversaturated at this point have been eliminated from from contention here if uh so to speak uh development standards are based on our C2 district with no modifications requested so all the setbacks your building Heights Etc um would be per that C2 code uh the larger area which is that 43 acre area that I mentioned uh subject to the general plan Amendment uh on the Eastern portion of the site where my mouse is um that will uh be a business Park area for the proposal um with uses based on that business park zoning District in our code as well as a couple i1 light industrial uses um but more narrowly tailored um to eliminate any sort of heavier industrial uses and uses with outdoor components um so this would be again uh maybe contractor type of businesses that could operate uh in these facilities small warehouses um nothing nothing of a scale uh that would be uh you know typical of like an Amazon style Warehouse um development standards within this area would be based on our business park district in our code with two exceptions uh the two exceptions are uh the maximum Building height and BP is limited to 50 ft uh the developer applicant is requesting to increase that to 65 ft uh that's kind of an industry standard for some of these industrial types of buildings um to offset that because that additional eye will have impact on uh surrounding properties um staff has requested and the applicant has agreed to provide a uh a wider a longer building setback uh we're adjacent to residential uh by by 50% basically from 50 feet to 75 ft all the other standards uh your setbacks and whatnot uh would be Landscaping Etc would all be per code uh the second Bull point on this slide is an important one we have uh staff has recommended two conditions uh as part of our recommendation this evening uh the first is to limit the maximum building uh area per building uh to 200,000 Square ft that 200,000 foot number is is kind of uh driven by some of the similar uh types of neighborhood relatable uh Business Park developments that exist in in our region um that are compatible with again adjacent residences um so with that uh they would be limited to those those smaller buildings there would be no possibility of of a large uh bomber building uh that we like to call them um the second is a Prohibition on uh cross St facilities those are the uh large Warehouse facilities that have dock doors on both sides uh that generate a lot of truck traffic CU one side is dropping off inventory the other side is picking up uh inventory for delivery uh that type of building would be prohibited uh here because we don't feel that is uh necessarily compatible with the surrounding neighborhoods um staff does feel that the uh proposed p is consistent with the uh neighborhood designation as well as the proposed business Commerce land use designation um if the general plan amendment is not approved uh there proposal would not be consistent uh with the general plan so it's it's very vital uh if you want to consider the zoning that the GPA first be uh first be approved um I do want to note here with staff's recommended conditions those are the two things I just talked about in terms of limiting the building area uh as well as limiting cross dos um we feel that the development that would result from this planet area development would be an appropriate transition uh to the residential that's planned to the north uh as well as the exist existing residential that is in the county to the east uh the western side with um with the two existing single family developments don't directly abut the site um but it would also be be compatible with with them um we do feel that the proposal does further compatibility and economic development related goals within our general plan I mentioned already uh with regard to uses heavy industrial use would not be permitted this would be again just light industrial uh Business Park types of uses that were fully enclosed and not visible uh you wouldn't see any sort of smoke TR typically traffic would not be uh extremely high to these things you wouldn't see a lot of truck traffic uh for the scale of uses we're talking about the proposed development design standards again are almost 100% consistent with code with the the one exception I mentioned which is the height increase um that we feel is adequately offset by the corresponding increase in setback um we do have uh good buffering and uh setback requirements built into this uh proposed pad uh there will be future sight plan review by the Planning and Zoning commission uh anticipated it's required for projects of 75,000 Square ft in aggregate uh or greater and we would certainly expect that type of square footage to be developed on a site this large again but UH 60 Acres or so uh the developer will uh complete their adjacent half Street improvements to both Watson Road and Southern uh Avenue on the uh south side of the site um and uh those would ideally include the intersection adjacent to the property they don't own but that will be um have to be determined based on the amount of right of way that's in place at that point the city can acquire that right of way uh the property will be served by City Water and Sewer uh the extent of the improvements that are are needed will be determined when a site plan uh is filed for the property uh and all departments have reviewed this proposal and uh have no additional issues uh there was a neighborhood meeting held uh back in August of last year at the coyote Library uh there were 10 attendees and I would call the response to the proposal mix there were uh a few people there that were in support of the project um some from the nearby neighborhoods that were not um maybe 6040 in in opposition I would maybe classify that um we did receive uh one email from a nearby resident opposed to the project on the grounds of traffic and light impacts uh which again staff believes would be uh mitigated with the the limitations on on building size and cross stock facilities all know of this meeting have been completed uh the applicant team I just want to point out this is not required um but they did go door too uh within that uh 500 foot mailing rad radius to talk to every homeowner who uh answered their doorbell so um we do appreciate that uh not required again but uh they did kind of go above and beyond and then uh pnz did recommend approval of uh both GPA and rezoning back in October uh there was one one resident opposed and one resident in support of the project that uh spoke during the public hearing uh mayor with that uh that concludes my presentation we do recommend approval of the general plan Amendment no stipulations associated with those uh and condition uh the rezoning to pad subject to conditions a through P I do know Bill Loi with Tiffany and Bosco uh on behalf of the owner uh is here and has a presentation as well okay uh let's let's go ahead and do the presentation Bill if uh if you would and then we'll do a public hearing and then open for Council questions um and while Ken's bringing over the clicker that hopefully I'll figure out tonight it's an inside joke I screw this up at the last hearing so um but I do want to start off by saying it's it's been a a really great process working with staff we have a client who's owned this property for five years um they have been trying to figure out what makes the most sense here and and we have spent a lot of time with Ken his staff um seeking input from all Departments of the city trying to figure out what what the best fit here is and Ken folks on the 55 Acres there and that's appropriately because that's what's in front of you tonight but I want to step back a little bit and give you a little bit of the history of kind of where we came from um as staff indicated the the the subject side is really the the property that's in front of you tonight um for the resoning that's part of the general plan um the red portion to the north is was always part of a future lenar Phase 2 uh lenar is the owner of all of this property Ken went through the general plan Amendment again if you look at sort of the blue employment and then residential right up against it in areas here in Buckeye you can see just south of the blue and in other parts of the valley there are these transitions where you go from not just the heaviest use to the to the most least intense use there there are areas where you commonly would put some kind of a transition in so that was really the the thought process here with this entire process to the north was Vanner Ranch north it's a a Lenard project a market rate um you know a typical subdivision that uh was going to be extended onto the 150 acres to the South and and I think about 2001 2002 uh lenar started to hear Rumblings of the Ross building uh getting permitted and again they had the zoning they knew that there was employment across the street um but this was what was planned for that southern 150 acres was more residential right up to Southern Road when they decided or heard and saw the approval for 1.7 million square ft right across the street they took a pause and said is that what we should be doing there are other areas in the valley and in the city where uh buildings have built next to residential we have the opportunity to build residential next to a big building should we be doing that or should we consider a different type of transitional buffer and so we came to the city with some different ideas about three years ago U and at the same time you know as I indicated uh the city was moving towards needing attainable housing needing you know more kind of reverse the commute so we started to look at what made the most sense uh given sort of the residential crisis that began to happen um we're across the street from an important employer uh for the city uh could we take a pause and and see if we could do this differently so that's when we came to the city uh in 2022 uh we said hey we have 150 acres we're across the street from from a fairly large user what if we were to do something in kind and for us it made sense because we controlled the residential to the north and we could be able to make sure that those buffers between our existing residential and these buildings um were U softer that they made sense in terms of setbacks and buffers uh we were met with I think a lot of kind of bride eyes and told to go back to the drawing board and I think we heard a number of recommendations and so we worked on it for about a year tried to figure out um how to soften up uh this transition from traditional single family down to sort of heavy employment we ended up with a version that looks like this and and this is the overall 150 acres and as Ken indicated only the South 55 acres is really subject to the application tonight but I think it's important to kind of throw it all in context because that's where we were uh we were told to kind of go back to the drawing board so we took three4 of that property and instituted uh a new residential component that Lenard's never done bringing a residential product to the city that is going to be in the sub $300,000 range in terms of a purchase these are single family for owner homes uh the purple and the yellow uh and it's the new lenar Cottage product and so uh this has not been done yet in Buckeye uh this is uh not a build for rent this is not a multif family this is not a rental at all this is a lar the biggest home builder in in in the country building a product that's desperately needed we thought it made a lot of sense as we were budding against the residential to the east or to the west and that we heard a lot from all of you on on the panel and from staff saying hey be sensitive to existing neighbors you know we have other buildings that had zoning against existing neighbors probably didn't really be that probably wasn't the best idea but they had zoning and it happened and we're living with it but let's not make that same mistake and so we draged the residential down and at the Hard Corner we created about a 12 acre retail component know this area I think is starving for for retail when we did talk to neighbors going door too uh some were concerned with just the intensification of the area and kind of the the more traffic of just all of the uses and combined but some are also saying hey we need some more services down here I don't want to drive all the way up North to along the freeway to get Services it would be nice to ride my bike uh and get something to eat or go go to the dry cleaner and so we wrapped the hard corner and again as Ken indicated the hard corner is owned uh by the farmer who you know used to own the whole property there's nothing we can do other than to hopefully we work with them closely and develop a retail corner so the retail corner is part of the pad zoning a tonight the pad B is everything to the west of it the the the the other buildings that you kind of see in more of the gray um and and again I think what Ken indicated is we had a neighborhood meeting with went door to door and we also talked to our neighbors in the county on the on the east side as well and went and spoke with them talked about you know what were some of the uses that they saw as a compatible use to some of those kind of Quasi business uses and and you know we did hear from them they said we would prefer probably not to have more residential right up against us so what you're proposing in terms of a business park not heavy industrial across the street but Business Park makes sense for us and there is a letter of support uh in the record that kind of demonstrates that support these are the ages again I I I don't want to oversell this tonight because this is not part of the application I'm just uh proposing it just because this is what's happening and this is part of the transitional um plan that we had in place is to have single story so there no twostory but single story Cottage type uh Villas uh on the north side of these commercial and business park uses and then to the north of that a typical um lenar residential um it's also Al important to know to the north vantana Ranch phase one they dedicated a School site they developed a Well site you can see kind of in the in the colored just south of the purple a second Well site that lenar is committing uh to the city as well so this is sort of the the area that we're living in we've got larger buildings to the South single family to the north and to the um to the west and so we're trying to come up with a transition and so we very much appreciate the back and forth with Ken and his team because the pad itself is a kind of unique zoning tool whereby you're not just zoning it to Industrial or or some kind of category that has a list of uses uh and standards you're zoning it to basically a build your own zoning and so we went down through all the the loud uses and many times step said nope nope nope nope and so that's in the code today those uses that don't make sense the uses that are incompatible were stricken and so we're we're narrowly tailored down to a set of uses for the commercial side and a set of uses for the business park side so I think it it makes a lot of sense the pad although it took a lot longer it's a little bit heftier document but I think it was a better document in the end as you can see I I did highlight you know the letter of support did come from our neighbor who is probably the closest and the most impacted by uh the business park buildings uh that letters in the in the packet as well he did come at the last hearing and spoke in support uh here's the letter as well so uh again what we try to do is take our time work with staff listen to your feedback go out to the community listen to their feedback and try to make sure that we weren't repeating some of the mistakes that and I wouldn't say mistakes but some of the conditions that we've heard from many of you just don't make sense anymore and on the left side of the panel or on the screen you'll see some of those areas where there's you know anywhere from 200 to 800t distances uh if you look on the right the the business park buildings to the closest Riata West Residence were 1,700 ft and were buffered by our own residential we're buffered by our own retail uses and the other thing too is when lenar builds the The Cottages to the north they're going to be able to disclose what's what's next to them they're going to be able to say this is what's planned next to them if if in fact that isn't already built by then and so that's different than living in a neighborhood and having something just kind of pop up next to you and so so uh having the same ownership I think is critical because we can build in ccrs we can build in buffers and we can make sure that if lar is selling this product next door that they're not allowing something to be be built that's going to take away from them the finances of this and this is never part of the dialogue but when lenar went down this path of providing and and trying to design this new product this Cottage product sub $300,000 product uh they had to do a lot to get there no other builders are really doing that so in order to get there some of the financial modeling of this 150 acres is going to allow for that so we're really taking the southern properties bringing on residential or or retail and and uh Business Park developers to help subsidize the residential to the north so that we can have a price point you know lenar also does uh buy down in rates you know they have I think sub five percent buy down in rates um I think for the life of the loan and and and Vicki who's here from lar will kick me if I'm getting this wrong uh they also have uh help for down payments so it isn't just a cheaper product and I don't want to say cheaper but more attainable product the lenar package has been developed and will be deployed here that will help owners buyers get into this product so it's it's again not on the table tonight this is not a residential reone but I think it's important to know that that has been Lenard's commitment this entire time um we took the next step and got some designs um put together uh this is along Southern looking at what would be the business park buildings with sort of the aggressive uh landscaping and again councilman this is the mature state but you know you will be able to see it at first but this is you know likely in terms of the setback off of Southern you know this is what you'll be able to see we will do our best to mitigate visual impacts along Southern of course if you turn this way and look the other way you'd see a 1.7 million square foot building so but I think it's important when we spoke to our neighbors and specifically the most impacted neighbor to the west or to the east it was important that we had proper setbacks proper screening um lighting that made sense uh along the buildings and so this is a little bit of the uh exhibits for the retail what the retail could look like again as Ken indicated a lot of this will come back through review at site plan again the story I think is worth telling on the left this is where we were we were way off you guys told us that don't put any more big boxes next to existing residents on the right after three years of going back and forth uh we think we came up with a transitional site plan and project as a whole that makes a lot of sense um for this area the great thing about this area is the infrastructure is there the water the sewer uh the electricity everything is there there's a light going in at the Hard Corner we'll do our improvements and this is a little bit different than other areas uh in the city where infrastructure is not quite there yet and we hope the infrastructure will get there and those areas will boom but this area is shovel ready and that's what we think makes this um the most kind of dominant area today and I think precisely why we wanted to have this transition and indicated the stipulations stipulations were very important stipulations are things that we we've talked about for the last few months and and and talked with many of you about on stipulation d um we were going through I think after the staff report was probably published back and forth with staff about the meaning of stipulation D and whether stipulation d uh really meant 200,000 Square ft on the entire property or just per building I added the per building in there just to make sure that that was clear two is underlined because I was going to come here and pitch a larger building to you guys and clearly we're not doing that tonight we we backed off on on larger buildings we want to make sure that we are uh staying Within what staff thinks is reasonable the second step is is an additional ask and I'll tell you that the additional ask is that um there are going to be times when a building isn't going to be fully cross do it will be a manufacturer that have a portion of a shipping component and to say no cross St uses outright kind of prohibits us or um kind of draws a Line in the Sand of some users that are off the table and lenar is not a an industrial developer they will find a partner that is and all of the Brokers and partners that said hey be as flexible as you can let the market dictate but we've also heard that cross do in and of itself doesn't make sense as a location so the stipulation in front of you I've added a proposed amendment friendly amendment that would basically say cross dos are prohibited unless approved by the city council through a conditional use permit process so meaning that if we found a use that had a component that was a cross do not the entire thing but a component that you as a city felt made sense on this piece of property given the context that we would at least have the right to come back and show you and pitch that your code has criteria for a conditional use permit uh it's got six or seven criteria that we would have to meet this isn't just a subjective test this is your code saying you have to meet all of these or we will say no so all we did there is ADD language that would allow for that to happen in the future future uh that is not on e that's not part of staff's recommended stipulations uh staff can comment on on you know their their opinion on it but that is something that we would ask uh Council to consider tonight which would be approval with uh a minor deviation on D which is just a clarification for per building and then the the addition to e but with that Mr Mayor and and council members be happy to answer any questions okay uh thank you Mr L let's uh um let's go to the public hearing first and then uh I'm sure there'll be some questions for you here in just a minute uh so uh we'll open the public hearing do we have any speaker request for the public hearing on item 5c no speaker requests no speaker requests any from the public wishing to speak I'm seeing none so we'll close the public hearing on 5C and uh Mr attorney we'll take these individually right so here and complete 5C and then we'll go to 5 do the public hearing process again okay thank you uh okay and then um let's go to uh Council and uh Council questions yeah okay councilman bear can you use the word business Commerce and you're saying that's for like a pool company uh electric company that has a small business that would be operating out of this this uh small Warehouse is what you're saying uh yeah mayor council member Barry um those are just two examples of of the type of businesses that would typically locate in a business Commerce it could be everything from uh retail hfit things like that CrossFit yeah sure uh indoor gymnastics you know those those types of facilities go in these types of buildings because of their higher ceiling Heights as well um so potentially yeah and another thing is uh you wanted to go from 50 ft to 65 ft in height what how do does anyone know how tall uh Ross is across the street any off the top of your head I know that's a uh mayor council member I want to say it's right around that it's probably 60 65 feet okay I can confirm that for you though let me let me look into that and confirm it but I it's it's going to be very the building that they're building is not much higher than that so it's pretty much the same height in standard right okay yeah councilman beard will the homes to the north be affordable as in under 300,000 yep Mr L mayor mayor and councilman beard as I indicated in the on the record uh and I confirmed with my client today lonar uh they're shooting for a 285 um this department of real estate frowns upon developers and Builders going out there and Publishing before their public report is done and so I'll just caveat that which is home builders usually don't say it will be this but we have assurances from lenar that under 300 and the target is 285 and again Vicky is going to kick me if I if I've got that wrong but I made sure to confirm today but yes we would put that on the record that that is the target are you willing to stipulate that well and here's the challenge and and and mayor cman yunker I I chatted with my my my good friend across the the attorney table the other day about this because we we did talk about this and so the the industrial retail is in front of you today not the residential so I I don't know if it's appropriate I think I can say on the record councilman Yonker that that that will be the Target sales uh is it appropriate to put as a stipulation on a commercial pad I would defer to your county your city council thank you Mr LLY I appreciate that mayor council member Yonker um that's a good question um the applicant is correct we are only dealing with the PA or the general plan Amendment as it relates to the the 60 plus or minus Acres at the south of the property and so um imposing a condition on the project to the north through this is probably not um not something that we that we' be comfortable doing under the current state of law I think you've heard from Mr Loi I don't think he's in a position to say that that's what it's going to be but I think if you carefully parse his words he says the that lenar has targeted the price point for this product to be around 285 and somewhere south of $300,000 and I think you're just probably going to have to take him take him at his word sir councilman beard you you're you're still up yeah the development to the north will that be I'm coming up to a council here soon or has it already been done can I can address that um mayor uh council member beard uh the planning zoning commission approved the preliminary plat for the neighborhood to the north back in October I actually no it was December uh the first Planning and Zoning commission meeting in December um the final plat will be coming forward uh to city council for approval some point unidentified date Mr Mayor councilman beard just just to add add to that so the the property the residential to the north it didn't need a rezoning it didn't need anything other than just platting so we weren't upping the zoning so it it didn't make sense to go along with this package that could go for before this did and so uh lonard Advanced that because they see the need all right thank you councilman Barry one more thing so you're G you're planning on building the uh business Commerce before you build the houses is that what you're that's what you're trying to get at mayor councilman Barry it's a it's a difficult question I think the the market maybe a year ago was a lot different than it was today with interest rates and I think um we were we were thinking a year ago that that would be the very first thing that goes is is the business park component because um frankly everyone wanted to be in Buckeye with with business park and industrial type buildings I don't know if the financial markets today is the same so I think it'd be hard for me on behalf of and R to really predict a industrial um either way it goes whether the residential goes first we will be notifying um them of whatever gets approved to the to the south of them or vice versa if it goes first then they will clearly have an understanding of what they're buying next to I do like the fact that you're uh going to be building smaller homes that's affordable for families as I was campaigning know I just just got elected uh a lot of people were talking about affordable housing and also the mayor said nationally they were talking about that as well so I do like that product as far as affordable housing is good for our community good for our city and uh we'll just see thank you thank you Mr L just for the record people still do want to come to Buckeye the interest rates haven't changed that at all yeah stupid would absolutely retract that and say everyone wants to be in thank you thank you just want to correct the record okay I do have a question on your yoner map here that you're showing on the screen I see that we have the setbacks for 1,700 feet 36 ft what is it on the East side to the homes that are in the county I know mayor councilman Yonker it is very very hard to see but if and I don't have it outlined but if you were add up the little white boxes on that southern building uh to the building to the to the east it's about 250 ft from building to their property line probably 300 from building to building okay and that one parcel that's right there by itself on the corner uh all the way to the bottom right of that uh picture that's actually a commercial property there correct the one you had highlighted as supporter um Mr Mayor councilman yoner to to the I think I have a picture so yeah to the Southeast yeah to the southeast so Southeast is a a rural residential County Island um zoned rural residential but they do have quasi business structure located there yeah um Council M if I may just to provide a little Clarity to um I just want to note when we're discussing this particular site plan um this is just very conceptual so um more so than than this it's the the set backs that are built into the document and the buffering that's required that um so the the layout of this would be determined at the site plan stage but we would have to meet all of our requirements so considerably um you know the building could be closer to the to that East property line than what's shown here okay but still far enough St feel Comfort um so let me ask you uh council member Barry asked about the height uh so we're going from 50 to 65 what do we gain with 15 ft um if we are looking at this as a true trans transitional uh use from the 65 ft as we were thinking that Rosses to the South how does adding the 15 feet what what's what's gained for that uh mayor council member I'll defer to to Bill to answer why they're requesting that um I could just speak from a from a planning and compatibility standpoint um the tradeoff for the additional required setback was sufficient for staff to to feel that it would offset the impact of that height on talking about sight lines is what you're accomplishing with that goal okay Mr Mayor councilman Yonker so your your industrial code today has a little bit of a step back Concept in it where you know you can get a little taller the further way you get back from it uh we try to mirror that and that's pretty common you know throughout the valley why 65 ft good question you know we we asked all of the industrial Business Park developers Brokers to say hey we're that's not what we but how can we set this property up for Success how can we attract the best users what are the things that cause users to go look somewhere else and height was one of them they said the inside height as you as you indicated some of the sports um Inside Sports they need a taller inside um some of the new warehousing techniques have taller racks so they need a taller inside height uh for inventory uh so we shot for 65 ft because it it makes the most sense for the most users to go in there and then staff says if you're going to do that you got to push it back and so um we we agreed that you know for for 15 we'll give 25 fet more of a setback so we felt like that was a good compromise okay uh and you had mentioned earlier Mr L that uh that you were your client was figure out what makes most sense for the site is what from what angle are we talking about most sense are we talking about most sense for them as the building it or most sense for the people of Buckeye mayor and council members it's a good question um you always have good questions you do uh very thoughtful I ask them yes so we spent about two years figuring out what would make the best transition not just for the for lar in terms of the window of selling the homes as opposed to coming right off of Southern into um you know a model complex and they're they're looking at you know massive building and pulling into the model complex and parking and staring at the building that was one component obviously trying to sell you know and not necessarily uh if there was trucks running up and down you know with from Ross and our cars trying to get in off of Southern does that is that a good uh mix of uses the question the the answer was kind of no so let's push the residential to the north have the residential accessing off of Watson let's avoid that and then let's cover it up and screen it you know for that future residential Enclave of of little citas up there so that was one component the future buyer and selling it to the Future buyer the other part was trying to come up with a couple uses where we would have the most flexibility up against uh residential so sometimes you'll see residential backing up to a shopping center that has a fries or a Walmart or something like that there's lots of deliveries lots of parking lot lights lots of activities maybe it's a Walmart they're open 24/7 so we were also trying to pick uses that made sense to locate right next door to these new residences and and we feel the smaller component retail the business park which was probably going to be more of a hours of operation in the in the normal standpoint um made a lot of sense to to tuck up right next to it so I think it was a it was how does lenar build a component that is sellable and how does lenar build in something next to it that's compatible and then how do we transition down to kind of a larger use so uh it wasn't an easy answer and and it was a good question so thank you um so the we mentioned that there was at the community meeting there was about a 6040 split uh for support I was at that meeting I didn't find that I found that everybody I spoke to was not supportive of it um just for clarification say from my standpoint that was there and I felt I don't think I missed anybody at that meeting um also I want I need another thing for clarification you had mentioned that in part of your presentation that the the thought process was uh changed around the 2201 Mark um at that point but then you also mentioned that they had owned it for about five years so which were yeah Mr clarification on that Mr chairman councilman yoner so so they closed on it in 2001 okay change happened in in 2022 you know and that was about when Ross was approved and we knew what was happening and so um they up until about 2021 they they were planning to do single family all the way down to Southern okay so you just said it backwards on the whenever you were doing your presentation that they have ch made the change five years ago and they bought it back in 2001 I do apologize okay no I'm I'm not busting your chops I'm just asking for clarification cuz it didn't line out okay uh that's all I've got thank you Mr Mayor yes sir thank you any other questions from Council uh I so I think uh so two two stipulations one is uh D which uh limits the per building size to 200,000 um and then the other uh potential stipulation which Mr L is has um asked for is the conditional use permit stipulation and uh I think I think I'm understanding what they're trying to do is provide a maximum flexibility for whatever user comes in uh and I I think we're not at this point willing to say yes let's just uh blank it and kind of go speculatively uh cross do facility but if you get a cross do facility the user coming in uh I think obviously we're not wanting the entire facade being cross do but maybe there's some component of it that could be under a conditional use permit approved is is that the gist of that uh that stipulation mayor yes um that that's the the stipulation that that bill has introduced first of all the change to D to specify per building that was always our intent so we staff fully supportive of that minor modification uh the modification stipulation e allowing for the council approval of the conditional use permit um I I guess you can look at it one of two ways the first is you're not approving anything you're not requiring you're not tying yourself to approve something down the road so it's not so much of a harm the other way to look at it um depending on which side of the bet I I get out on um is I don't know if I see a condition that cross St will be appropriate um I mean even though they can propose it I'm not sure there's something that they're going to be able to do that I'm going to necessarily think is compatible with the surroundings so um if if we want to go through the process and give them the opportunity um I guess there's no harm in that but um at the same time I'll take some convincing to to be able to support it but there's no there's no um nothing compelling us to approve that conditionally use permit at that time it's it's really completely our call staff input uh I would assume that would go through pnz as well yes uh mayor typically um so this is another little bit of a a Nuance or or wrinkle to the stipulations typically uh conditional use permits are solely a Planning and Zoning commission matter the way the bill has introduced stipulation it would go to pnz um for recommendation uh and then come to council for for ultimate approval so there would be more oversight than typical um for that uh as far as is it is it committing you to anything U it's committing you to approve it if you find that it meets the requirements of the conditional use permit that it's a compatible use that it's these things I think I think you could probably find reasons to not approve uh the conditional use um down the road depending on what the proposal is um that would be valid reasons and I don't think the the intent is some kind of a a bait and switch on our part It's not leading the applicant along it's U I think we've talked about really depends on what that use is and if that use came in and said uh 80% of the building we want facade on the front side we need three doors over here for inputs or or exports or whatever they are uh and then the entire back is is docks then then I think that's something worth considering especially uh if if we relate it to who that potential user could be and I've no idea who that is and um and I I don't think they have any idea that's just leaving them some flexibility for the future and that's a good point I I've always looked at this like um you know a cross do would be complete two sides of dock doors but you know maybe there is some small variation of of what that is that could potentially be appropriate it's hard to say but possibly but we can punt that to later and um and then have the opportunity to say here and here at that time okay okay uh no are we locking ourselves into anything if we agree to that stipulation uh mayor council member hagestad I think Mr galika got it right I think I think that's right you're giving them the opportunity to present uh a future case they've got to meet all the criteria for the issuance of a use permit so I don't I don't think you're committed locked in on anything other than that you'll give them an opportunity but at most it's a maybe yes sir thank you it could be a no it could be a yes there's several criteria that have to be met in order for a use permit to issue and you're the finder of fact uh as it relates to those um criteria if that's been Yak you have something else yeah just on that standpoint you know we're talking about the maybe and the the if if they bring come back with that and that's all fine and good but we also need to remember as this group of seven up here that we are representative government and if we're hearing from our constituents they don't want X Y and Z it is our responsibility to to hold the line and make sure that we're doing that for them that's all I have to say about it okay thank you okay Council for agenda items 5 C what is your pleasure Mr Mayor I'll go ahead and make a proposal to accept 5c with the two stipulations proposed to be included I'll second okay I have a motion for approval and a second uh all in favor say I I I and opposed nay n right I heard two Nays I actually can we just roll call vote that so we're official on who we have council member Yonker nay council member Barry hi I council member Goodman hi council member hagestad hi council member beard hustus I wbor I motion carries okay thank you all right Mr L do hate to interject um um the two stipulations were actually for D so the the zoning case we just took 5c that was the GPA we're SE doing these separate Mr Loi so we're about to take action on 5D so 5c stipulate there were no stipulations to 5c it was to I think the motion was to add the two stipulations oh it oh it did I I did not hear that um you add those on to seat as well no hold on I appreciate that I apologize I I neglected to hear that motion as it was made uh we're going to need to go back then and fix that there are no stipulations attached to the the general plan Amendment okay that's my fault mayor I apologize for that if we could uh um yeah I think we can resend the vote and let's just start over again on on on the motion if we could get another motion made on item 5c okay uh vice mayor would you like to make another motion without those two stipulations Mr Mayor I'd like to make a motion to approve item five C is in Charles I'll second okay we have a motion and a second for 5 C uh and roll call vote again please council member Yonker n council member Barry I council member Goodman hi hagestad hi council member beard hey vice mayor hustus hi mayor orsborne I motion carried roughly the same count okay thank you plus or minus all right uh so item 5D will need to hold a public hearing I do not have any speaker request cards for that do you have any over there requests no speaker request cards any from the public wishing to speak I'm seeing none so we will close the public hearing we've had the discussion nothing else to add Mr GLE on 5D and we'll need a motion uh in VI mayor uh I'm assuming you're making that with the two stipulations on this one yes Mr Mayor uh to make a motion to approve agenda item 5 D is and David with the two stipulations proposals included I'll second okay I have a motion uh to approve agenda item 5D with the two stipulations and we have a second on that also uh so can we do a roll call vote on this as well council member Yonker nay council member Barry I member Goodman I council member heistad n council member beard nay vice mayor hustus I mayor orsborne I motion carries okay thank you all right Mr Kika thank you for all your work on this and Mr L thank you all right item five 5e Council to take action on resolution number 01- 25 adopting fees for Solid Waste Services pursuant to Arizona revised statutes providing for repeal of conflicting resolutions and providing for severability and we have Miss Amy Murray presenting good evening mayor and councel I'm Amy Murray interim Public Works director here tonight to discuss residential Solid Waste rates tonight we are asking Council to take action to approve resolution 0 1-25 adopting Solid Waste fees now we got to this point our previous Solid Waste contract expired November 30th of last year so we began a competitive bid process last February from there on November 19th Council awarded a Sol waste contract to Republic Services which became effective December 1st this contract is a 7-year contract with three one-year extension options we've been asked how we are educating the community throughout this process the dates listed in bold are per state law however we have buil a comprehensive educational Outreach plan which began last year and will continue throughout this year we are taking advantage of the many forms of communication to our citizens from digital and social media to print and inperson discussions this is a multi-team effort between several City departments and Republic Services and we are also working with homeowners associations this slide shows the proposed breakdown of the monthly costs over the course of the 7-year contract there are two rates listed a rate for automated curbside 96g cart service and a rate for the inground 29 can collection the inground rate is for residents with inground cans only now the reason for the price difference is the inground collection is not automated it is not collected curbside and it requires three times more labor than the automated service contract line is the cost of the contract to the city from Republic Services the city fee line is the cost to oversee the operation of the solid waste contract our Environmental Services Division including household hazardous waste this fee also supports our utility billing and customer service functions and includes the amount needed to approach our 60-day Council approved Reserve requirement this chart represents how we are building towards the target Reserve each year of the proposed rate plan the green line represents the 60 day Reserve policy red line is our projected Reserve balance and the blue bars represent net revenue the rates presented tonight support the solid waste Enterprise fund to approach our financial policy Reserve goals as we have placed an emphasis on building towards the reserve throughout the rate plan and we project we will be near to achieving this goal by the end of the seven-year contract now throughout the course of the contract staff will monit monitor the fees and should adjustments need to be made we will return to council as needed often times we're asked how we measure up to neighboring communities with the proposed rate increase Buckeye remains in the lower half of this graph and is represented by the yellow bar now this graph does not take into account what other cities are doing in the future but it is assumed they will be looking at increasing their rates now this chart represents the 96 gallon carts in terms of benchmarking and we do not have data to compare benchmarking for inground rates now with this contract we will also offer elective service rates these services are on an as needed basis they are not monthly fees when residents sign up for a solid waste account they have a 30-day grace period in which to request swapping of their carts at no charge however if after this grace period they need their carts swapped or requested their carts to be swapped they will be charged $30 per cart now please keep in mind that this does not include a swap request for a normal wear and tear such as a broken wheel a cracked can or a broken lid we also have on this contract a damaged cart fee which we will charge when residents have negligent use for their cart such as it burns down because of hot ashes or fireworks but once again this fee will not apply due to normal wear and tear there is no fee for normal wear and tear swapping of cards so that is the end of my presentation tonight thank you and we are asking Council to take action to approve resolution 0-25 adopting fees for solid waste collection okay thank you Amy um Council any questions yeah councilman hagad yeah do do we have a chart up there for the rates going forward versus the contract price so the contract price would be for the 96 gallon rate would be the first line and the contract line for the inground rates would be on the fourth line and then the total 96 gallon rate fee would be on the third line and then the ingr rate rate fee total would be on the bottom line so we have this broken out by the contract rate that Republic Services charges to the city and then the city fee to implement the contract okay and it's it's my understanding that the neighborhood that requires the inground service has an obligation in their covenants in their HOA that requires the inground are you aware of that or have you looked into that at all um I have not looked into that at all that that is a requirement I I do know that that is a service that they have opted to have and there are several thousand homes that have been approved to have this service yeah so I've looked in this we've looked into this over over the years several times and there are my understanding there are covenants in that uh area that require the ing cans and then to in order to switch to the 96 gallon carts there would actually have to be infrastructure made that would allow them to put the cans behind um pre-made walls or brick brick walls or other privacy uh maybe the gentleman behind you has more information absolutely thank you Mr Mayor councilman xad uh yeah so uh right now the uh cc&rs do require that the residents in this area do have inground cans uh and the idea is if they want to move to above ground cans and 96 gallon cans uh there would need to be some way to hide them to put them behind a bush or behind a fence or behind their property or in their garage or in the garage right so we we we've looked into this over the years and and we've not only talked to talked to the HOA about it but there's a significant um so one the question the point I'm trying to make here is this is not a city decision that uh requires them to have the cans in there and in order to get the cans out of the ground and behind a fence or in the garage um the covenants the actual uh requirements on the land in those on those properties would have to be changed and then additional U infrastructure would be required is that your understanding yeah it's my understanding that they would need to be able to um actually vote on it that they would need to make that decision that's correct Mr Mr C councilman so it's not a city decision that's correct okay and then we've also kind of done some informal I've done some informal uh Discovery up there talking to the residents and talking to at least one well represented group up there and that I'm told that their membership overwhelmingly wanted this and when we looked at it in past years um the residents uh indicated to us that a large percentage or portion of them wanted these inground cans CU they one didn't want them junking up their garage two they didn't want to have to put up the the privacy fences um and then there was also concerns about individuals who um on the active adult side that would struggle with the 96 gallon can getting it to the curb and getting it back so um do you do you remember any of that or can you confirm all that Mr Mayor councilman hagstead absolutely thank you for bringing that up we actually did present and tried to have uh well we had ongoing discussions between public Public Works in the HOA there and many of the members of their community on the opportunities that they would have the needs that they would have to be able to make uh those decisions because it would be up to the community to make those decisions uh and the different solutions that could occur uh and we were well there was a lot of feedback that they did not want to move in that direction that that the members of the community not did not want to move in that direction thank you and then the the last thing is I wanted to point point out uh staff uh Doug and uh the city manager and and the City attorney worked really hard even though um there is a significant increase on those INR rates uh we worked really hard to even those rates out so that the there wouldn't be a huge increase in the first couple of years in fact the first year is only $6 and there is no increase in the second year uh just to kind of even those out and make it uh the we we have to cover the rate of the contract and then we have to cover cover our our costs as well for as a city so we did the best we could and I I thank the the executive team and all others and yourself uh for trying to make that as easy as possible on the residents and uh I understand it was a lot of work and and even with uh Doug without us without a contact in we got we got it to these rates thank you very much everybody we had a contactless Doug we did yeah uh I wish I had a camera because him looking at a t at a computer screen without a contact was pretty like a popey episode um appreciate you saying all that and uh tremendous amount of work I think in in softening and that's what you were getting at with the the actual increase in price softening that over time so it's not such an Abrupt uh increase in the first year yes y okay um Council then on item 5e uh what's your pleasure Mr Mayor I'm making a motion that we approve agenda item five E is in Edward second uh we have a motion for agenda item five Echo and a second all in favor say I I I and opposed and 5e passes all right thank you very much uh item number six comments from mayor and councel yeah Mr Mayor i' like to uh just just bring up and congratulate our community services for the Buckeye days festivals that they put on uh walked up and down with you and Tina and it's kind of cool day to be down to Buckeye walk all the way from Fourth Street down to the down to the museum and check out the cookout down there and walk back it was uh was a great day so good job that was yep Toto vice mayor I would like to Second what my colleague just said Buck ideas were a lot of fun and I'd like to especially comment on the kids section of it down um where they had also had the hamburgers down by the swimming pool they had a great uh group of bounce houses and a lot of stuff down there really entertaining for the kids this year and I think we need to promote that even more if we have to put signs out on the street or something because I think it was underutilized there were a lot of kids down there having a lot of fun for quite a while so they had an enjoyable time and the hamburgers were very good as usual down there also uh I'd like to compliment the fire department they had the ribbon cutting and the push in of the fire truck at 707 and the folks down in Blue Horizon seemed to enjoy it because they were even walking in the back gate to join the celebration and the breakfast we had and everything else down there so that was a lot of fun and I think the neighbors down there really enjoyed it and really do support having a firehouse right next to their homes so that's all I've got this evening Mr Mayor thank you thank you sir counc mgin yeah I'd just like to thank the city um for supporting an event last week the White Tank Mountain Conservancy diamond in the desert event um the conservan is committed to protecting the White Tank Mountains um as well as Wildlife corridors that um large and small animals can move back and forth that was a great success um raised over $68,000 for the Conservancy so just want to thank the city for their support thank you councilman uh so agree on every single one of those things it's uh it's like um it's a really really busy time especially for community services and when community services are doing events everybody's doing events because there's fire involved police involved and every other department that uh that's a part of that uh so thank you for all of the events you have put on and the event that's coming up uh not this coming weekend but the following weekend uh the air Fair uh 14th 15th and 16th this going to be an awesome event uh bigger and better than last year fireworks uh the same plane that was shooting fireworks off of his wings Dan I hope I'm not stealing any of your talking points and um uh night air show uh with a I think I could say drone show out loud we have sponsors for that so uh Friday night will be the practice night uh but Saturday night is the big uh uh evening air show two air shows that day so and then just a wonderful relationship that we have with aopa and the partnership that uh we have with them as well as this year um Return of the uh military collector vehicles um so a lot of fun to be had out at the the Bucky airfare if you haven't to that get to it if you have been to it get to it again it's a lot of fun uh and then just a a thank you to all staff when uh items come up like this we've left the site comparison on uh for whatever reason we should have nice calming music after all of the uh the conversation related to these things uh this or the um uh the agenda item that talked about the trash rates or all of the other stuff that's on consent there is a massive amount of work that goes on behind the scenes by staff and it uh it may be Ken that gets up and speaks or Amy that gets up and speaks uh but there is a tremendous amount of work that's happened behind the scenes on that and just thank you to all staff uh for everything that you do here at the city of Buckeye and making uh the city work and making uh business happen here uh in the city of buck I greatly greatly appreciate it with that item number seven a city man manager's report and summary of current events thank you mayor uh between you and uh council member yoner you stole all my thunder so we're good thank you glad glad we could steal it item number eight proposal for future agenda items I'm here none item number nine with nothing else we are adjourned I was planning